Our national mental health crisis is getting worse. On the front lines of this battle, indispensable healthcare providers are working day and night to mitigate this epidemic. But these dedicated professionals are now under attack by the New York Times. The paper’s harsh criticism lacks important context. Even worse, its reporting undermines the care these providers give – potentially putting millions of patients at risk.
Every day, behavioral healthcare providers work tirelessly to treat patients as more people nationwide seek out mental health treatment. According to Dr. Thomas Insel, former director of the National Institute of Mental Health, 90% of Americans rightly believe the nation is in the midst of a mental health crisis. More than half of adolescents and one-third of American adults report that they felt anxious “always or often” over the past year. More than 20% of American adults are also experiencing a mental health disorder. One in twenty is suffering from a severe mental illness. This is not a medical crisis we can ignore.
Behavioral health professionals navigate some of the most difficult patient caseloads in the healthcare delivery system. Their role requires technical expertise, quick thinking, and resolute decision-making. Additionally, the strongest empathy for their patients in extreme emotional and psychological pain is critical.
Despite their difficult positions, these healthcare workers have become the targets of intense scrutiny. While navigating an already difficult environment, mental health professionals are facing hostile press from reporters who lack on-the-ground mental health experience.
Recently, the New York Times published an article criticizing large behavioral healthcare providers. The report, based broadly on extreme cases of inadequate care, painted a distorted image of these providers. It is also plagued by a lack of situational detail. Shamefully, the Times’ reporters also use the tired money-shaming narrative against these providers, claiming they prioritize financial concerns over patients’ medical needs. Yet, there’s not a single mention of the actual greedy players in our system who jeopardize patient care—the nation’s large health insurance plans. Blake Madden’s analysis at Hospitalogy shows that, since 2010 when the Affordable Care Act was enacted, six vertically integrated health insurers have seen their combined revenues increase 12.1% compounded annually, from $307.8 billion in 2010 to a staggering $1.36 trillion in 2023.
This is journalistic malpractice.
Accountability in healthcare, however, is essential, and mental health practitioners should not be absolved of blame when certain unfortunate circumstances arise. But sensationalizing isolated incidents, as the Times is doing, can threaten mental healthcare providers’ ability to provide the care on which their patients rely.
This is the last thing we need, as the nation grapples with a dwindling supply of mental health practitioners that cannot keep pace with patient demand. As has been reported from all corners of the country, America is facing a provider shortage. More than 150 million residents are living in a designated “mental health professional shortage zone.” The Association of American Medical Colleges projects that America will face a physician shortage of up to 86,000 physicians by 2036.
Far too many people, despite facing debilitating health challenges, are suffering from restricted access to care and long wait times. Amid widespread burnout and moral injury, waning resources, and departing colleagues, remaining mental healthcare providers have found themselves in increasingly challenging conditions. Without question, behavioral healthcare companies are serving as an invaluable lifeline to patients in times of crisis.
Giving constructive criticism can foster treatment innovation and improve patient outcomes. In this case, however, the New York Times has taken the opposite approach. The paper presents a complex field in black and white terms, omitting the countless positive outcomes that occur for every regrettable experience. Specifically, the report accuses Acadia Healthcare, a behavioral healthcare provider, of holding patients longer than medically necessary. The company denies the accusation, telling the Times, “Quality care and medical necessity drives every patient-related decision at Acadia.”
But left unmentioned are the many instances when patients are released after initial observation and go on to regrettably hurt themselves or others upon their immediate release. Health insurers, which sometimes push patients to be discharged before they are necessarily ready, also play a role in the length of treatment.
From the media and administrators to practitioners and patients, all stakeholders should assess our behavioral healthcare system accurately, not through a lens that only focuses on historical outliers. Through comprehensive reporting, journalists have the potential to help a medical field in crisis, too. The sole pursuit of headlines is a disservice not only to readers, but also the behavioral health professionals doing the tough work. Hopefully the Times can chart a different course in its future reporting. If not, the paper will just be giving one more reason for prospective caregivers not to enter this vitally important field.
Christopher Sheeron is founder and president of Action for Health, a national non-profit organization working to ensure fair outcomes for critical healthcare issues.
